Josh-da-man

A lot has chaned in the past seventeen years.

The "millennial" generation doesn't want a bunch of "stuff" like we did. They're content to listen to music on a streaming service, read their books on a Kindle, read their comics on Comixology, and watch tv and movies on services like Netflix.

Josh-da-man

I would assume that anything that isn't a major new release is probably selling a few thousand, or even in the hundreds.

I really can't see a "typical" Criterion release (ie, a movie that 99.99% of the population has never even heard of priced at $40) selling to over a couple thousand copies, if even that, to a handful of serious collectors.

Same with Scream Factory and Kino.

BuckNaked2k

I know TT has runs of 3,000 copies which you can easily pick up months, even years after initial release. Only a few titles in the horror genre seem to sell out quickly.

orangerunner

I think that would paint a pretty depressing picture.

Some of the films released by the smaller companies are pressed in limited runs of 3000 and the only reason they sell-out (and become quite valuable) is because the companies advertise they are limited to 3000.

If they didn't mention the 3000 unit cap, I would imagine they would have a lot of surplus.

I feel bad for people who spent $100 for their mint copy of Christine from Twilight as Sony has now mass-produced it for $10. It would interesting to see the sales numbers.

davidlynchfan

^^ they still have the exclusive Isolated Score fwiw.

Why So Blu?

The OCD crowd must have it. If so, I still have a brand new copy of the TT release that I would part with for an even $100 shipped.

#Seriouslythough

Alan Smithee

The picture quality that Blu-Rays bring is more than worth it. I'd say anyone who can't see the difference between a good Blu-Ray and streaming is a "casual fan"- but many of those people would still be buying VHS if that were still available.

Seems like a lot of theaters were showing the "Back to the Future" movies last night- wouldn't it have been funny if Universal had gotten all of the streaming copies taken off-line while that was showing, so if that was how you "owned" those movies you'd pretty much have to go to the theater to see them on that day?

Why So Blu?

^ Yeah, it's good stuff (BD) but people nowadays don't want "stuff." I can totally see the difference and personally prefer BD to all others but if I catch it via streaming or standard DVD then that's fine too. I will have seen the movie. I don't need more stuff to add to the piles of stuff I already have. I'd rather use the money saved on BD purchases and go on a trip or put towards a downpayment on a house, etc.

rw2516

This is about the decline in preference of BD as first choice. Everything being equal, what is someone's preferred way to watch a movie in a perfect world.

rw2516

This is about decline in BD interest. How are these smaller companies doing as opposed to five years ago?

rw2516

This is the core issue. If people had unlimited funds, lived in a castle with all day free to sit in front of the tv and prefer to stream what they watch.

rw2516

The numbers that would be telling are unit sales across a series. Hunger Games or Hobbit. Interest in the movies themselves would be more steady across the board, eliminated skews from blockbusters like Jurassic World.
What is the decline in units sold with each successive film? If numbers are available, what is the increase in paid per view streamings with each successive film?

morriscroy

It may possibly also be a person's mindset, independent of age.

For example, if my house burned down (or flooded) with my entire cd/dvd/bluray collection (along with everything else like my books, vinyl records, guitars, etc ...), most likely I would not start collecting again. I think I would just go straight to streaming.

Why So Blu?

Exactly.

milo bloom

Yeah, I have to admit, I do enjoy the collecting aspect but at this point in my life if I were to lose everything I would stick with streaming for most of my TV and movie viewing, only buying physical media for really special titles that I want the extras for and might have issues with rights.

(And I probably would not get back into Magic: The Gathering if I lost my current collection; there's a reason they call that game "cardboard crack" .)

BuckNaked2k

I really worry about this issue. I know it's just 'stuff', but my media collections have taken years to accumulate, with many of the items I own being OOP/rare/collectible, etc. Other than my dog, my media collections are the only irreplaceable things I have.

davidh777

If I had to start over, I definitely wouldn't have as deep a collection, but I wouldn't go streaming only. I would need at least a core collection of my favorites that I know wouldn't disappear on me. Digital titles that I owned might work if I trusted the service.

DJariya

Yup, I would have been so much more selective and not purchase so many sale titles. I've blown through and wasted thousands of dollars over the years on junk with little to no replay value. Many were just impulse buys. I've finally started realizing that with TV titles. Don't need to own a physical copy of every tv show I love.

I also wouldn't go streaming only and killed disc purchases. There's still summer blockbuster movies and a catalog title here and there that I want to own. But the majority of films otherwise can be watched once and that's good enough.

orangerunner

The smaller companies are doing really well compared to five years which has to do directly with the state of physical media and big studios dumping their lower-tier catalogue titles to the little guys that can operate on a high-margin/low-volume model.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing, in fact it's great because Shout!, Twilight, Kino etc. seem to be run by people who love what they do and know their market really well.

The downside is that as a collector I'm faced with a choice of hanging onto my DVD copy of a marginal 30-year-old film that I'm realistically only going to get around to watching maybe once every ten years or fork out $20-$30 for the Blu-ray that I'm only going to watch once every ten years.

BuckNaked2k

Boy, ain't that the truth. I have boxes of stupid DVDs of shows that are in continuous syndication. Easier to just DVR>Watch>Delete>Repeat than own the sets.

Other than truly cinematic shows like Twin Peaks or Firefly, TV box sets are a giant waste of space.

Alan Smithee

Which at the very least are cut for time, with lots of commercials to skip through. I don't even HAVE a DVR as there's so little on broadcast TV worth watching (I have been enjoying syndicated reruns of "The Middle", which airs here with NO screen clutter, but far too many commercials. If the show was on Blu-Ray I'd buy it, but not on regular DVD. Wish it was at least on Netflix or the like.) If I did care about recording TV though I'd want a permanent way to store it, just like with tapes. My crazy ex-girlfriend liked her DirecTV DVR, and when at her place once we watched "The Naked Gun" DVR'd from HBO that week- which was fine, but I already have that movie on disc and could've brought it over instead. Why would I DVR a movie I'd already seen, watch that once and then delete it? I'd at least want to keep that recording so I wouldn't care if it was ever shown again. That's what people did in the old days with VCRs and an HBO subscription.

I'm all for the smaller companies taking over physical media completely- they seem to care more about what customers think, and they don't have to sell a billion copies and have unlimited growth every year to keep doing what they do.

rw2516

I'd take the insurance check and replacement everything in a single order from Amazon. Presto! Like it never happened.

slop101

I know it's not the typical catalog title, but the new re-release of the Back to the Future trilogy seems to be selling out all over the place. Pretty impressive for what's essentially a repackaging of previously released discs.

rw2516

I didn't switch to Blu-ray till two years ago. I bought a player for upscaling. On a lark I picked up Jackson's King Kong out of Wal-Mart bargain bin to see what fuss was about. I was sold lock, stock and barrel.
I then searched every film I own to see if it was on BD and made a list. I reviewed the list and anything I didn't feel I would want to watch again I crossed off and sold the DVD.
I checked out reviews to see which BD titles were screwed up and a step down in quality. Eliminated them. Example: Hills Have Eyes(1977)
When I title gets announced for BD release I decide if I want to really own that title. I either get the BD or sell the DVD eliminating the title altogether from my collection.
I decided to go in for a penny, in for a pound. If I don't feel like upgrading a title, I don't feel like owning the title. If I feel lackluster about upgrading, I know the title itself is not important to me.
Then there are the all time favorites that you've seen so many times you never feel like watching but need to own because they are a favorite. I'm 57 and have seen The War Wagon more times than I can count. I never even opened the DVD. When I watched the BD I enjoyed every second like it was the first time.
All told there are about 800 titles available on BD I want. I have 700 of them.
When I'm watching a BD I'm thinking this is worth every penny.
I've been collecting since 1983 and have never enjoyed it as much as I do now. Blu-ray is like a whole new world. I'm having a blast with it.

morriscroy

If the insurance check was large enough, these days I would probably put most it into 2-5 year gov treasury notes (or some kind of "tips"), instead of buying my entire cd/dvd/bluray collection again.

Probably the only bluray I would buy after a fire or flood destroyed my entire collection, would be the original Battlestar Galactica.